Case 2407616/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Mohammed Awais Rashad v North West Logistics Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2407616/2023
- Decision date
- 2 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tobin
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Mohammed Awais Rashad
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant did not attend the hearing on 22 March 2024. The Tribunal was satisfied that he had been sent notice of the hearing, noted that he had not attended the previous hearing, had not provided telephone contact details as ordered, and had not requested an adjournment.
The Tribunal recorded that the claimant brought claims of unfair dismissal and race discrimination. It struck out the claims primarily for repeated non-attendance, and also because the claimant had not complied with an important Tribunal order, the case was not actively pursued, and the Tribunal considered that a fair hearing was no longer possible.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was struck out pursuant to Rule 47, with alternative strike-out grounds identified under rules 37(1)(c), 37(1)(d) and 37(1)(e). | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The claim was struck out pursuant to Rule 47, with alternative strike-out grounds identified under rules 37(1)(c), 37(1)(d) and 37(1)(e). | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- rule 2 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure
- rule 37(1)(c)
- rule 37(1)(d)
- rule 37(1)(e)
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.